Re: Why XFS not in the main kernel?

From: Jens Axboe (axboe@suse.de)
Date: Tue Oct 23 2001 - 01:44:33 EST

Next message: Albert D. Cahalan: "Re: The new X-Kernel !"
Previous message: Jens Axboe: "Re: [Lse-tech] Re: Preliminary results of using multiblock raw I/O"
In reply to: Robert Love: "Re: Why XFS not in the main kernel?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, Oct 23 2001, Robert Love wrote:
> On Tue, 2001-10-23 at 01:35, Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote:
> > Is there a reason not to include XFS in the mainstream kernel? It
> > is very stable and many (including us) are using it in production
> > environments without problems.
> >
> > Obviously, there can't be liscening issues, because XFS is released
> > under GPL.
>
> No one doubts XFS is stable. It is a great fs. But XFS includes some
> modifications to block layer and such that people aren't ready to

Not really the block layer -- this used to be the case. SGI kiobuf block
stuff was too ugly to live, and consequently it even died within the XFS
tree :)

-- Jens Axboe

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Albert D. Cahalan: "Re: The new X-Kernel !"
Previous message: Jens Axboe: "Re: [Lse-tech] Re: Preliminary results of using multiblock raw I/O"
In reply to: Robert Love: "Re: Why XFS not in the main kernel?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 23 2001 - 21:00:35 EST